1. PUBLIC
Sharing Knowledge Between Open Cities
How can we start today?
Mathias Van Compernolle & Nils Walravens
Open Belgium 2017

2. “Will the real Smart City
please stand up?”
Hollands, 2008

3. What makes a city smart?
The wrong way
• Use case-driven
• Vendor lock-in
• Fragmentation
• Either top-down or bottom-up
• Technocratic
The right way
• Problem-driven
• Open data, processes, systems
• Shared standards and services
• The city as a platform
• Democratic

4. Power of
Data
Open
Platforms
Systemic
Innovation
The Parametric
Smart City
Ballon, 2016

5. Power of
Data
Open
Platforms
Systemic
Innovation
Privacy
by default
Privacy by
design
Scripted
Serendipity
Increase
knowledge
RDI-role
for cities
Open
technological
black box
PPPP
Increase
visibility
Leadership and
horizontal
structures
The Parametric
Smart City
Ballon, 2016

6. Power of
Data
Open
Platforms
Systemic
Innovation
Privacy
by default
Privacy by
design
Scripted
Serendipity
Increase
knowledge
RDI-role
for cities
Open
technological
black box
PPPP
Increase
visibility
Leadership and
horizontal
structures
The city as
permanent
Living Lab
Regulate the smart city
architecture
Put forward
ambitious and
measurable
goals
Develop smart city
regions
CTO with
step-by-step
approach
The Parametric
Smart City
Ballon, 2016

7. QUADRUPLE HELIX
The Quadruple Helix as a guide for innovation, knowledge creation, democratisation
of knowledge and system development
COMPANIES
KNOWLEDGE
INSTITUTIONS
CITIZENS GOVERNMENT

8. QUADRUPLE HELIX
COMPANIES
KNOWLEDGE
INSTITUTIONS
CITIZENS GOVERNMENT
The Quadruple Helix as a guide for innovation, knowledge creation, democratisation
of knowledge and system development

9. QUADRUPLE HELIX
COMPANIES KNOWLEDGE
INSTITUTIONS
CITIZENS GOVERNMENT
The Quadruple Helix as a guide for innovation, knowledge creation, democratisation
of knowledge and system development

10. QUADRUPLE HELIX
COMPANIES
KNOWLEDGE
INSTITUTIONS
CITIZENS
GOVERNMENT
The Quadruple Helix as a guide for innovation, knowledge creation, democratisation
of knowledge and system development

11. FIRMS
• Firms create, develop and commercialise technologies
• Looking for a a commercial advantage against competitors.
• We can do-anything principle
• “Thé Government” as financial instigator for innovation
COMPANIES
KNOWLEDGE
INSTITUTIONS
CITIZENS GOVERNMENT

12. ACADEMIA
• STEM disciplines as core partners in high risk technology development
• Social scientists confronted with the computational turn
COMPANIES
KNOWLEDGE
INSTITUTIONS
CITIZENS GOVERNMENT

13. GOVERNMENT
• ICTs within the internal organisation shabbily treated
• ICT and informatics not a sexy political theme (‘innovation on the other hand is)
• ICT-capacity, knowledge and skills: withdrawn from the organisation via outsourcing
FOCUS ON ICT
COMPANIES
KNOWLEDGE
INSTITUTIONS
CITIZENS GOVERNMENT

14. GOVERNMENT
• Vendor lock-in
• Kind of oligopoly that is slowing the innovation capacity of local governments
FOCUS ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND ICT COMPANIES
COMPANIES
KNOWLEDGE
INSTITUTIONS
CITIZENS GOVERNMENT
Source: Agency of Domestic
Governance (2015)

15. GOVERNMENT
• ICTs within the internal organisation shabbily treated
• ICT and informatics not a sexy political theme (‘innovation on the other hand is)
• ICT-capacity, knowledge and skills: withdrawn from the organisation via outsourcing
• Kind of oligopoly that is slowing the innovation capacity of local governments
• Governmental structures are making it difficult to define a common approach
• Challenge today: data exchange within one administration and between several
administrations
FOCUS ON ICT
COMPANIES
KNOWLEDGE
INSTITUTIONS
CITIZENS GOVERNMENT

16. GOVERNMENT
• ICTs within the internal organisation shabbily treated
• ICT and informatics not a sexy political theme (‘innovation on the other hand is)
• ICT-capacity, knowledge and skills: withdrawn from the organisation via outsourcing
• Kind of oligopoly that is slowing the innovation capacity of local governments
• Governmental structures are making it difficult to define a common approach
• Challenge today: data exchange within one administration and between several
administrations
• Challenge tomorrow within a smart city context: how to manage the data flows
generated by machines outside the organisation?
• Smart City = lack of vision + city marketing
FOCUS ON ICT
COMPANIES
KNOWLEDGE
INSTITUTIONS
CITIZENS GOVERNMENT

17. GOVERNMENT
• ICTs within the internal organisation shabbily treated
• ICT and informatics not a sexy political theme (‘innovation on the other hand is)
• ICT-capacity, knowledge and skills: withdrawn from the organisation via outsourcing
• Kind of oligopoly that is slowing the innovation capacity of local governments
• Governmental structures are making it difficult to define a common approach
• Challenge today: data exchange within one administration and between several
administrations
• Challenge tomorrow within a smart city context: how to manage the data flows
generated by machines outside the organisation?
• Smart City = lack of vision + city marketing
FOCUS ON ICT
COMPANIES
KNOWLEDGE
INSTITUTIONS
CITIZENS GOVERNMENT

18. GOVERNMENT
• ICTs within the internal organisation shabbily treated
• ICT and informatics not a sexy political theme (‘innovation on the other hand is)
• ICT-capacity, knowledge and skills: withdrawn from the organisation via outsourcing
• Kind of oligopoly that is slowing the innovation capacity of local governments
• Governmental structures are making it difficult to define a common approach
• Challenge today: data exchange within one administration and between several
administrations
• Challenge tomorrow within a smart city context: how to manage the data flows
generated by machines outside the organisation?
• Smart City = lack of vision + city marketing
FOCUS ON ICT
COMPANIES
KNOWLEDGE
INSTITUTIONS
CITIZENS GOVERNMENT

19. GOVERNMENT
A (new?) debate on the core tasks and position of a government arises:
• What will we do ourselves (again)?
• How can governments keep up with the technology transition and assure they have the
right competences: new profiles: ‘socio’-informaticus
FOCUS ON ICT
COMPANIES
KNOWLEDGE
INSTITUTIONS
CITIZENS GOVERNMENT

20. A new debate on the core tasks and position of a government arises:
• What will we do ourselves (again)?
• How can governments keep up with the technology transition and assure they have the
right competences: new profiles: ‘socio’-informaticus
• What do we want as a society in a smart city context?
COMPANIES
KNOWLEDGE
INSTITUTIONS
CITIZENS GOVERNMENT
A government that adopts the technology
An all-knowing and controlling government

21. CITIZEN
• Who is the citizen? Changes within themes and domains:
• Patient, client, customer, (end-)user, tourist, inhabitant, mobilist, producer, prosumer,...
• Citizen participation: is this the right concept in smart cities?
• High pressure on giving back autonomy to (groups) of citizens
• Traditional participation channels (eg. municipal advisory boards are on their way back)
• Degree of participation in the smart city?
COMPANIES
KNOWLEDGE
INSTITUTIONS
CITIZENS GOVERNMENT

22. CITIZEN
Activity Role of the citizen
Self control Initiator/Responsible/
Manager/Decider
Coproduction Partner
Codecision Partial decision maker
Advising Bringing in ideas, advising
Consulting Consulted/Interviewee
Informing Customer/hearer
COMPANIES
KNOWLEDGE
INSTITUTIONS
CITIZENS GOVERNMENT

23. CITIZEN
• Citizen participation: is this the right concept in smart cities?
• High pressure on giving back autonomy to (groups) of citizens
• Traditional participation channels (eg. municipal advisory boards are on their way back)
• Degree of participation in the smart city?
• New ways: more temporary engagements and within networked relations
• Passive participation via technology and monitoring (Waze, GPS, logged and filmed
citizens,...)
COMPANIES
KNOWLEDGE
INSTITUTIONS
CITIZENS GOVERNMENT

24. Citizen and privacy
Privacy = protection
Privacy Institutes and upcoming regulations: PSI & GDPR (vague)

25. Citizen and privacy
Privacy = protection
Privacy Institutes and upcoming regulations: PSI & GDPR (vague)
Privacy by design: a combination of technological and legal ‘adjustments’ to ensure that the
power balance in the exchange process that goes along with privacy, is back in favor of
the subject/end-user/logged-one/citizen/… (Ballon, 2016)

26. Citizen and privacy
Privacy = protection
Privacy Institutes and upcoming regulations: PSI & GDPR (vague)
Privacy by design: a combination of technological and legal ‘adjustments’ to ensure that the
power balance in the exchange process that goes along with privacy, is back in favor of
the subject/end-user/logged-one/citizen/… (Ballon, 2016)
• Data aggregation, new alternatives for the National Register Number (BE), crossroad
databases, citizens and data safes and….
• Open by default
• Encryption
• Rebuilding the Internet?

27. Where to start?

28. CONTEXT SMART FLANDERS

29. Context of the Smart Flanders programme
Diverse initiatives of the Flemish Government, publication ‘Smart Cities’ book by Pieter
Ballon, international trends and research point to the importance of collaboration
Quadruple helix approaches
Complexity and different speeds
Combat fragmentation, level playing field, link to international initiatives from own
strengths
Smart Region approach: Smart Flanders

30. PRINCIPLES

31. Core principles of Smart Flanders
Support programme, communications channel, knowledge and interaction platform
Focus on real-time open data and shared reference architectures
Cooperation between cities and actors from the quadruple helix
Implementation-driven
Internationally networked
Lighthouse model for smaller cities (13 centre cities and VGC Brussels)

32. PROJECT STRUCTURE

33. Threefold project structure
1. Open and Agile Smart Flanders: Maturity Check
2. Smart Flanders Data Pilots: Reality Check
3. Smart Flanders Testbed: Conformity Check

34. 1. Open & Agile Smart Flanders: Maturity Check
Support in identifying potential datasets and developing a roadmap towards publishing
Support in running an individual maturity check as a guide in building an open data strategy
Support in joining the Open & Agile Smart Cities network (oascities.org)
Starting a permanent OASC-Flanders branch
Writing a joint and widely supported Open Data Charter

35. 2. Smart Flanders Data Pilots: Reality Check
Implementation-driven approach means that:
- Every city opens at least one real-time dataset every year
- Every year 1 or 2 joint data pilots are started as use cases, together with partners
from the quadruple helix
Starting from themes and challenges present in the participating cities - not from the data
Identification, roadmapping and matchmaking with support of Smart Flanders

36. 3. Smart Flanders Testbed: Conformity Check
In a later stage of the project, the City of Things-infrastructure (CoT) in Antwerp can be
used as testbed for new, joint solutions (hardware & software)
The Smart Flanders testbed will be an interoperability lab that allows testing of openness,
conformity and performance of innovative infrastructure and services in a real-life setting
Smart Flanders will support shaping the CoT tests (ideation, roadmapping, collaboration
model), while the execution of the large-scale test in negotiated between cities and CoT

37. RESULTS

38. Targeted results year 1
Launch pilot programme (M08): aimed at quadruple helix
Open Data Charter (M12): publication integrated and supported text
Maturity Check tool (M12): First iteration (validated by M18)

39. TEAM

40. Prof. Dr. Pieter Ballon
Strategic Coordinator
pieter.ballon@imec.be
Director imec – SMIT – VUB
PhD Communication Sciences
Author “Smart Cities: Hoe Technologie
Onze Steden Leefbaar Houdt en Slimmer
Maakt” - Lannoo, 2016
Strategic coordination

41. Dr. Nils Walravens
Operational Coordinator
nils.walravens@imec.be
Senior Researcher imec – SMIT – VUB
PhD Communication Sciences on public
value, mobile apps en Smart City strategies
Operational coordination and content
development

42. Pieter Colpaert
Chief Technology
pieter.colpaert@imec.be
Researcher imec – IDLab – UGent
Finalising PhD: open data publishing for
maximal reuse
Contact technical questions and vision on
data publishing

43. Mathias Van Compernolle
Policy & Methodology Lead
mathias.vancompernolle@imec.be
Researcher imec – MICT – UGent
Initiated PhD gestart on governmental
innovation, with focus on data government
Development Maturity Check and
collaboration techniques, policy expertise
open data & e-government

44. Dr. Davor Meersman
Pilot & Re-use Lead
davor.meersman@imec.be
Business Developer imec – SMIT – VUB
Contact OASC-Flanders and international,
support and matchmaking pilots

45. Jan Waeben
Monitoring Lead
jan.waeben@imec.be
PhD Researcher imec – SMIT – VUB
Initiated PhD on international Smart City
monitors and benchmarking
Contact and support of monitoring activities

46. CALL TO ACTION

47. What can Smart Flanders mean for the Open Belgium community?
Looking for an open dialogue with all relevant actors
We welcome other levels of government and administrations to share expertise and insight
Open to ideas that can support the programme and our cities further
Data pilots can make the collaboration with actors from the quadruple helix very concrete
What would you expect from Smart Flanders?

48. PUBLIC